Homburg
Daring greatly
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2007
- Posts
- 13,578
Buddhist scholar Robert Thurman (Uma's dad) translates other attempts to translate Om Mani Padme Hum to sum up what it means when it is used, for example, when a being dies "I am filled with compassion for all that are suffering and thus is the way of the world".
Rather like Kurt Vonnegut's "So it goes".
In some places in Tibet they chop up the dead and toss the chunks to the vultures. So it goes.
![]()
I've always thought that sky burial was the coolest way to go.
--
I'm going to assume I'm misunderstanding you. You are not really suggesting that people who do not believe in "god's hand in evolution" are unable to form independent thought and extrapolate from what they read, are you? You are not suggesting that such people blindly follow exactly what they see? Because I believe 100% in evolution that did NOT involve "god" - like I said, I don't believe in "god" - but I do not consider myself a "literal-minded reader". I have considered the evidence, and I do not believe that any higher power of any kind was involved in evolution.
FULL STOP. I am NOT advocating intelligent design. I am arguing AGAINST it as an educational concept. I think it is idiotic to demand that ID be taught in schools alongside Evolution Theory.
What I was trying to argue here was that I do not understand why religious people have problems with evolution, and why they see it as contrary to creation or religious beliefs. Why must god work in spontaneous induction, as opposed to organic change?
Excuse me? What the fuck? This is about as insulting as I've seen you be, ever. My atheism is not a "personal" thing but your attacks on atheists, myself included, I take personally. I must be misunderstanding you here, too, because I find this wildly offensive and I know you're not that grotesque (gorillas aside).
I must really be misunderstanding you here. I can't believe what I'm reading, so I know I must be wrong.![]()
*facepalm*
Did you read the earlier posts where someone else posited the difference between "active" and "passive" atheism? "Passive" atheists find no evidence to support it and thus do not believe, while "active" atheists take a lack of support as some sort of proof of non-existence, and tend to proselytise that idea.
I'm sorry that it insults you, but most people that I've met that were Atheist Crusaders, had emotional baggage that motivated them, not pure logic as is so often claimed. They were rebelling against their parent's and upbringing or whatever. The ones that aren't fire and brimstone have been, in my experience, less likely to arrive at their non-belief for misanthropic reasons.
And I am referring to anecdotal experience as someone who was an Atheist Crusader, and is now a plain old non-believer. If my experience insults you, I apologise. It is still my experience though.
And my "attacks" aren't aimed at "athiests". They're intended to comment on crusader assholes that happen to call themselves "athiests" and use it as a club. If that descriptor fits you, I can understand why you'd feel insulted. I doubt that it does. You're pretty damned tolerant.
--
According to a couple of my books, one possible (and common) translation is "Hail to the Jewel in the Lotus."
Om of course is the untranslatable seed syllable. Mani is loosely translated as jewel or treasure; the implication is that in contemplating the Lotus we will find inside it the "key" (Gk. cleito, root word of clitoris; Sk. ku-, root syllable of the words cave, cumulus, church, cucullate and cocaine, among others) to enlightenment. Padme or Padma is usually translated as Lotus, with all its lovely feminine implications, as well as the idea that the universe is merely a lotus blossom in the sacred and eternal belly button of Brahma.
And Hum rhymes with Yum.
On planet bijou, we use the translation "I actively adore the little jewel inside your Lotus, baby. YUM."
Hope that helps.
Given that the phrase is intended to be free of independent meaning, just about any translation in keeping with the meme works.

